>1(
The Battalion
O
PINION
Page 7 • Tuesday, June 29, 1999
t|Thou shall not establish religion...
t New legislation violates Constitution by allowing display of Ten Commandments in school
have a -
! attont'
enceioi
and im :
buted t
ren -
longer
dden ir. ■
1 Noes:
hough the First Amend
ment of the Constitution
strictly prohibits making
laws “respecting the estab
lishment of religion,” the
House of Representatives acts
as if its job is to promote
Christianity on campuses
around the country.
I On June 17, the House ap
proved an amendment to the
Marc
GRETHER
Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1999, which would
permit schools to display the Ten Commandments.
The amendment, passed by a vote of 248-180, was
added to “promote morality and work towards an
end of children killing children” according to the
amendment’s sponsor Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Al).
I Rep. Bob Barr, (R-Ga) went so far as to say that
if [the Ten Commandments had been displayed in
Columbine, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris would
Sitll3' n ? ver have gone on a shooting rampage.
What utter nonsense.
■ The Ten Commandments have been well known
throughout the world for several thousand years,
yet this has not kept them from being broken. In
the past, even priests and preachers have been
caught violating these holy decrees.
I Remember Jimmy Swaggart?
■ It is likely that he had the Commandments post
ed nearby while shuttling off to his interludes with
a Bocal prostitute.
I And given the upbringing of Klebold and Harris
in this Christian-dominated country, they were
pfobably aware of the edict not to kill, yet this did
not stop them.
I Moreover, it is simply not reasonable to assume
the mere sight of the Ten Commandments would
prevent anyone from breaking them.
I Think about how often a speed limit sign makes
y6u slow down.
I Moreover, this bill will certainly be found un-
:auses.
lOf Oft
i hm
3 killt
'avid lb
)efen$t:
•iosee::-
', and ■
just, i a
1 toiisf
iblicat;-
■
;azine
ons o
jdical
J the
constitutional if passed by the Senate and approved
by the President because the bill favors one reli
gious view over others.
In writing for the majority opinion in Abington
School Dist. v. Schempp (1963), Justice Tom C.
Clark notes that in “the relationship between man
and religion, the State is firmly committed to a po
sition of neutrality. ”
But the House’s legislation firmly sides with the
religions of Christianity and Judaism in their recent
bill, violating the neutrality called for by Justice
Clark in the decision.
Though Congress often seems to disregard the
Constitution in passing bills these days, it should
not be unreasonable to hope the bills passed could
have some conceivable impact on the problems
that are trying to be solved.
The bill could have contained a meaningful
statement calling on schools to promote sense or at
least sensibility, rather than giving schools the
right to use a proselytization tool. The legislation
the House has enacted will in no way deter youths
bent on breaking the law.
The House could have passed a bill inviting
schools to teach the values and ethics found in the
Ten Commandments, rather than using the actual
text. Few people would be opposed to the princi
ples underlying many of the Commandments, yet
the use of the actual Commandments is illegal and
unnecessary. Many of the people cheering the pas
sage of this bill would be up in arms if a similar
measure had been passed allowing the use of com
parable teachings from the Koran. This clear dou
ble standard shows the disingenuous use of a reli
gious symbol rather than a teaching tool.
Certainly there is a place for great religious
works to be talked about in schools.
Any worthwhile class on world history should
teach about the Ten Commandments and other
great law codes used be ancient societies, particu
larly those still in use.
1
4S?-
/loses
Gabriel Ruenes/The Battalion
However, context must be given when talking
about religious works.
America is not a theocracy, nor should it be. In
an obvious effort to be seen doing something, the
House has passed a flawed bill.
Hopefully someday soon the House will begin to
understand its powers have limits, and bad things
will happen no matter what is done.
Bad legislation will not prevent problems from
happening.
It may not make things worse either, but it will
keep things from getting better.
Marc Grether is a graduate student
in mathematics.
i® Estate tax should suffer speedy death
!tS VSK
-L that the tax-
he ; es in this country
;’n are driving you to
or your grave.
5 a.t But unfortu-
at nately, death will
favo’ not stop the fed- Jeff
i: ofiK era I government. BECKER
joingici Their taxes
.aid. Will rob even beyond the grave,
aesini: The U.S. government places a tax on
on. dying. The estate tax, as it is technically
aetsite called, can tax an estate’s inheritance
’’hiteHot by up to 55 percent. When a person
ary pf’dies and bequeaths his or her posses-
■sofld sions, the Internal Revenue Service will
ys the send a representative to assess the val-
s, a din ue of everything in that estate.
mar;: All assets are appraised, whether
the f ^ey be homes, furniture, jewelry, land
, the in or even business assets.
2ongrei: Depending on its total value the as-
if pas; sessor will levy a fine on that estate
n j]jt a ni| anywhere from 37 percent to 55 per-
y ” cent after the first $625,000. The de
ceased obviously cannot pay, so the re
cipients of the estate — usually the
ant) children — are left holding the bag.
■/Vjli: government also taxes any per-
evaluat sonal gift during life of over $10,000 per
3 Indie' year, making the estate tax difficult to
get around. Expensive estate lawyers
six eni are needed to minimize the oppressive
d sine! cost incurred by the government,
spend#' The estate tax is a sugar-coated term
lid, for what should be more appropriately
say i labeled as a death tax.
knol The death tax is devastating to farm-
uts bil ers and family-owned businesses. Chil-
'i"who dren of the deceased are often forced to
sell parts of the family farm in order to
pay them off. All too often, the farm
* dies with the farmer. In family-owned
businesses, 70 percent of families aban
don the business after just one genera
tion and only 13 percent of them last a
third generation. People in this country
cannot afford to die.
One of the express reasons for the
government’s additional revenue was
redistribution of wealth.
However, the plan has largely failed
because the extremely wealthy can af
ford the burdensome cost of estate
planning to minimize the taxes owed.
Smaller businesses, farmers and most
Americans cannot.
After 75 years of enforcement, the
fee has not accomplished its purpose,
and it acts as a barrier to economic ad
vancement for all Americans.
“People in this
country cannot
afford to die."
The death tax strikes Americans
when they are most vulnerable — after
the death of a loved one. This reprehen
sible burden must be eliminated.
And besides the odious stench of
robbing from the grave, there are many
other valid reasons for eliminating the
fee. While destroying businesses and
farms, the duty only brings in around 1
percent of federal revenues.
In fact, the duty decreases the
amount of revenue taken in by the gov
ernment by breaking up and destroying
tax-paying companies.
Furthermore, there are enormous in
efficiencies in the collection of the fee,
with 65 cents of every dollar brought in
used for enforcement.
The death tax is not good for the
American economy. It destroys jobs,
constricts businesses and punishes peo
ple for succeeding. The tax inhibits sav
ings and work and encourages con
sumption and spending, the opposite of
what most economists would desire for
a healthy economy.
The death tax amounts to double
taxation. It fines revenue and assets
collected throughout a lifetime which
have already had income taxes and
sales taxes paid on them. Such double
taxation cannot be tolerated and should
make people mad.
Fortunately, many members of Con
gress feel the same way that the Ameri
can public should feel about the death
tax. In 1997, legislation was passed
which will weaken the death tax pro
gressively until 2006. While this is a
good first step, the real solution to the
problem is to eliminate the death tax al
together.
U.S. Representative Christopher Cox
has recently authored a bill called the
Family Heritage Preservation Act which
will eliminate estate taxes altogether.
The bill has gained the support of near
ly 200 members of the House.
But many attempts to reform the es
tate tax have failed in the past. A grass
roots effort is required to get the Her
itage bill passed.
Everyone should write his or her
representative to urge him or her to
support this bill.
Death taxes are unfair, infuriating
and must be stopped.
Jeff Becker is a sophomore
computer engineering major.
EDITORIAL
Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views of the
editorials board members. They do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of other Battalion staff members, the Texas A&M stu
dent body, regents, administration, faculty or staff. Columns,
guest columns, cartoons and letters express the opinions of the
authors.
Editorials Board
KASIE BYERS
Editor in Chief
SALLIE TURNER
Managing Editor
VERONICA SERRANO
Executive Editor
CALEB MCDANIEL
Opinion Editor
NONI SRIDHARA
Campus Editor
Halls of Justice
Current plan for honors hall unfair to other students
The University Honors
Program is an important en
tity on campus, and its ef
forts to attract high-per
forming high school
students to Texas A&M have
enhanced the academic
quality of the student body.
However, the program’s
most recent attempt to
make itself more attractive
to honors students is being
devised at the expense of
other Aggies.
Beginning this year, plans
will be underway for a new
Northside dorm devoted to
upperclass honors students.
Through a transitional
process, Clements Hall will
become the honors hall.
Though the idea of a
tight-knit honors communi
ty on campus is not inher
ently wrong, transforming
Clements Hall would pursue
unjust means to justified
ends.
Cloistering honors Aggies
in Clements Halls would
promote the Honors Pro
gram through preferential
treatment of its students.
First, it would take away
any opportunity for “regu
lar” students to live in a co
ed hall on Northside.
Moreover, Clements Hall
is the only modular hall (be
sides Lechner) that houses
males on Northside, and it
is one of only four on the
entire campus.
Reserving Clements for
honors students would
worsen residential options
for men.
It is understandable for
honors students to want to
live near one another, and
creating living arrange
ments for them is certainly
worthwhile. But taking
Clements Hall away from
Northside “regular” stu
dents would be unfair, and
it would only engender re
sentment toward the Pro
gram.
Therefore, other alterna
tives to honors housing
must be pursued.
The honors hall could be
located on Southside with
out as seriously depleting
the number of co-ed, modu
lar halls.
The Honors Program
should also consider the vi
ability of housing honors
students together on one
floor of several halls.
Surely, honors students
can share the wealth. And
since residential resources
are already limited, to leave
Clements Hall alone is the
only fair thing to do.
Parking program at Northgate
unsafe,
economically unsound
Person
nishei
Ryan
GARCIA
,utb :
A s the
week
end
party site for
thousands of
; Aggies look
ing to relax
after a stress
ful week of
class and
work, North-
gate is a tradition as rich as
Texas A&M University itself.
The various drinking estab
lishments that comprise North-
gate have transcended the mere
label of “bars” and have become
tourist attractions in their own
right. In the past few years, this
has become a recognized fact,
and the revitalization of North-
gate confirmed it as a tourist hot
spot.
Nothing indicates this more
than the parking dilemma that is
now as ingrained in Northgate as
the names carved into the tables
at the Dixie Chicken. With its
emphasis on aesthetics, it is un
derstandable that Northgate’s
impetus for revitalization was
tourism rather than practicality.
Northgate’s parking fiasco is
the pay lot directly behind the
Dixie Chicken and Fitzwilly’s.
The ticket system used to pay
for parking is impractical. Visi
tors to Northgate are required to
estimate how long they will be
on the premises and pay for that
amount of time in advance. This
set-up requires standing in line
outside, usually for at least 15
minutes, as the lone ticket ma
chine toils non-stop and the line
grows exponentially long.
Several female students ex
pressed their concerns over
standing in line alone, largely
outnumbered by inebriated
males whose better judgment
has long since deserted them.
These conditions make females
prime targets for unwanted at
tention and harassment.
“You never know what you
are going to have to face,” said
one female junior English major.
The very idea of pulling intox
icated people away from their
good time and forcing them to
wait in line together as they grow
more and more impatient, not to
mention aggressive, should have
sent a red light flashing to some
one, somewhere.
The only flashing red lights as
of now are those of the police as
they routinely break up fights re
sulting from Bubba’s eyes and
hands finding themselves on
someone else’s girlfriend in line.
It’s best to let these people
make their way
to the bar
where they
can have a
drink and
calm down.
In addi
tion to the
compromis
ing positions
both sexes
are placed
in, the pay
lot also has a
deterrence ef
fect, resulting in
numerous Northgate visitors
parking illegally in other areas
and walking rather than dealing
with the time-intensive pay
process. A student crossing Uni
versity Dr. or Church St. on a
weekend night is playing the vir
tual reality ver
sion of Frog-
ger, as
drunken dri
vers relent
lessly zoom
I back and
forth.
Even
Northgate
businesses
lose out be
cause of the
pay lot situa
tion. Should
customers at
Northgate’s drinking establish
ments have too much fun and
wind up spending more time
than their original estimate, they
must endure the ticket-line wait
all over again. Most opt to leave
rather than go through this or
deal. If customers were not
forced to make the choice, most
would remain at Northgate,
spending even more money in
their zest for a good time than
what a parking lot of this size
can generate.
The pay lot can by no means
accommodate all of Northgate’s
visitors, and will certainly not
solve all of Northgate’s dilem
mas. However, right now, the
Northgate pay lot is only adding
problems when it could be a step
in the right direction towards re
ducing them.
Ryan Garcia is a senior
journalism major.